http://www.lptn.org/news/articles/96
Kind of late on this ruling. Didn't know it happened on June 24th. Amazing.
"The 5-4 ruling, issued on June 22, 2005, declares that local governments have the authority seize private property against the owner’s will in order to allow some other private organization to use the property for “economic development” purposes. The 5 majority judges were John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Bryer."
Our most basic right as Americans, gone. The right to own property. This is the plan they use, it's unbelievable how people have trouble seeing through the lies. They write the Patriot Act and say it's for our protection, they take away our right to own for "econonic development", they control it all and give us bullshit excuses to support them. There is no Constitution anymore even if they say it's still there. When the time comes we'll know these mesaures are not for our protection, but for our apprehension. Why would they protect us? Do you think they really care about us? They won't even talk about the Genocide in Darfur on any News channels because hey it's not their problem, right?

What do we do to fight back? I don't know, criminals fill Washington. 5 our of the 9 Justices are Communist bastards, Congressmen allowing any of this to happen should be fired for not doing their job, and the President impeached for treason. They're everywhere. I think the only part able to lead this Government the way it should have been are Libertarians and it's not limited to them only so don't think I'm some extremist. I can change, but this makes too much sense it hurts. When you think about it, do you think this is a part of the God's plan? I think so. Here is a list of 50 signs before Judgement Day. http://www.ummah.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-1651.html
Sign 22 reads: Trustworthiness will be lost, i.e. when authority is given to those who do not deserve it. I think that sign is talking about America and the people in charge. The problem I've been having for the past ten minutes is reading the signs of the future, it doesn't talk about or make slight references about a Police State in any way after Sign 22. So America probably won't last long or just be another short-lived modern Nazi germany. Well, that only means the people will prevail, I hope so. I have to shower now, talk to you later.

Finish me

http://infowars.com/articles/London_attack/brazilian_police_tube_firm_odds_cctv_footage.htm
Interesting. Men in military garb invade a party in Utah. http://www.utrave.org/showthread.php?t=19971
Some comments posted on the forum talk about how unnessecary that act was, "This event was 100% legal. They had every permit the city told them they needed. They had a 2 MILLION DOLLAR insurance policy for the event. They had liscenced security guards at the gates confiscating any alcohol or drugs found upon entry (yes, they searched every car on the way in). Oh, I suppose I should mention that they arrested all the security guards for possession."
It's all progressive, I don't understand why the media doesn't cover this? It's happened a few times and it's "forgotten." At this rate our rights are going to be "forgotten" as well. Hell, what rights do we still have? The Bill of Rights has been raped, figuratively speaking. Having permits for something we have a right to do is unconstitutional, you can't argue with me or anyone about that because it's true. Let's talk about the Bill of Rights while we're at it. The first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." This allows us to talk about whatever we want, whenever we want.

I want to clear something up first before going into the first amendment fully. After thinking about a comment by Alex Jones I don't think having a political label is important. I say this because I've recently said I was a Libertarian, but here's a quote I'm starting to go by. "Although labels are ulitmately meaningless, I consider myself to be a classical liberal, in the vein of Thomas Jefferson or George Washington. I believe in the Second Amendment and National Sovereignty."
And before you say, "Oh A Liberal!" Here's a definition: "Classical liberalism is a political and economic philosophy, originally founded on the Enlightenment tradition, that tries to circumscribe the limits of political power and to define and support individual liberty and private property." For some reason I don't like the word liberal. I never really have, but put classical alongside it and it seems a little better.
OK, now back onto topic. I'll be using Good To Be King as a source here on the interpretations the Bill of Rights. "It is often said that we should never talk about religion or politics in public places. Why not? It is unfortunate that expressing our opinions has been deemed socially unaccaptable. If Americans were more willing to discuss religion and politics with their friends and aquaintances, I doubt we would have the political problems that currently exist in Washington." The point is, TALK! It doesn't matter what it's about, and according to the first amendment it doesn't matter if it's offensive or not. That's the point of it. We have the right to say whatever we want, even if it offends you. If you don't like it, who said you have to listen to it? I do believe in civil arguements as well because it's more classy and respectable. However, if the need arises we can be more assertive and yell about it, there's nothing wrong with that.

Will update later, this isn't finished.
I guess I won't finish it.

Music

I thought of something interesting a little while ago. You know, with Emo music. I've been listening to FuseTV's Emo music video's and they're honestly all about the same thing. They're always singing about how they can't live without their girlfriends and how "depressed" they are, then some even go on talking about hurting themselves by something like slitting wrists. What I thought was, Emo music is the same trash as Boy Bands. It's the same damn little kids who are now a little bit older and now they're so sad but years ago they sang, "I wanna be with you" to the next album's, "Show me the meaning of being lonely." Now after they got older and realized how terrible these songs were they found Rock, kept those feelings, but now sing them with a new tune. That sounds about right, and what's pathetic is most of these kids are terribly unoriginal; they just hop on the bandwagon and see how far it takes them. Make some sense. Enough with my crappy rant, that's just "The Truth" in my mind's eye.

On L.

I've been reading a lot about Evolution vs. Creation and it's VERY fascinating. Although I am a creationist, I do read both sides with an open mind and try to give both respect. Through experience in the topic the only thing that could ever change me is the presence of "missing links" even though no one has found any yet. If evolution is such a rational and right explanation, don't you think there would be more evidence and less observations? We've done SO much excavating and with that we should have found things like half-bats or other links, but we haven't found anything at all. After seeing things like fossils of ants who haven't evolved for the past 100 million years or dragonflies for the past 135 million I can only conclude it can't be real. Until there is hard evidence and not, "It makes sense because everyone says so" I can't believe it. I guess if we haven't found it yet the chance of finding missing links in the future would be impossible. Well anyways, enough talk about evolution/creation. I've got more to talk about now below.

Since this is a new idea I've been developing I warn you this won't be well structured so give me advice.
Well, after hearing a few things about some people and unused advice from some other people I'm starting to doubt if there is true love. What do I mean? It's pretty deep, but it's an interesting thought. Having to choose between contradictory beliefs, I find myself doubting if love is actually that great a thing. Love is a strong feeling with additional hormones to emphasize the feelings. There can't be such a thing as true love with another human being (but I do believe in true love with the higher being). Since there's only one God(assuming you believe what I do), and He has infinite power you can love him through fear, gratefulness, or both. With humans it's different.

One piece of food for though is even if you're in love with one person, you can fall in love with another or many others. It's known that the hormones of love fade away after about 3 years with the partner because you know them personally and not as the sexy counterpoint you didn't know. After those three years, it's all up to your mind and your sense of loyalty to stay with that person. Assuming true love is with one person: Loyalty and true love go hand in hand, without one you can't have the other. There can't be a destined relationship between two people, the couple is only together because they both are extremely loyal(or one is materialistic.)

The advice I get from close adults is interesting, they say have as much fun as you can with as many girls as you can before you marry. But another friends word is, "In the end you'll be a lot happier if you are a virgin and marry a virgin. These people who go around today screwing all in sight won't be happy at all. It's better for you." Using these two opinions I tried inventing what I'm writing about now, but I'm not so sure that it's going to work out the right way. Will I actually be happier with opinion one or two? How do I know for sure if I can't do one over the other? Some people talk about "onegina" and how marriage is a terrible bond, why? According to the masses, polyamorous relationships rules while monoamorous may be more boring. I also ask, when has the public ever been right? Right now, my decision is monoamorous because I feel like I'll live life with a storybook ending even though my first attempt was so stupid and pathetic I don't even want to talk about it. The only deciding factors on choosing between the two is: "Is it really that good?" and "What does Religion say?". From what I've heard, some people say it's not that great while others say it's fantastic. Is it really that good or are you so sex-crazed that even your brain has become a sperm-manufacturing facility? What does Religion say? Well I already know. I don't really care about how good it is anyways, what's the point of doing it so much to make yourself happy if it's not that amazing. If it is amazing, I guess that whole situation explains itself. Life is short so I suppose doing whatever you want with one person you trust and know is a much better feeling in your heart, mind, and soul than it would be with a bunch of "towels." So about this whole true love thing, don't use the heart only because the heart is much more prone to mistakes than your driving force: the mind. Use both and choose wisely. If you can keep yourself loyal with one person and have as much fun with a special other that's better than any storybook ending because it's real. Purity is a rare find to come across these days, when I or anyone else finds it I hope for only the best. I talk about love like I'm actually going to fall for it. I'm like Nikola Tesla in a way, even though he was a virgin his whole life I feel like I might be too because I can care less. Wow, I just found out Tesla also read a book I loved and memorized it, "At that age [24], I knew entire books by heart, word for word. One of these was Goethe's Faust." Wow, word for word... That's something you think humans can't do, but damn I can't believe he loved that book as much as me. What can I say? Great minds think alike. Well, anyways I feel really inspired to read so I might as well do that before my little inspiration timer runs out. Bye

Oh Washingingtonienne!
"By popular demand, I have finally created a key to keeping my sex life straight.

In alpha order:

AJ=The intern in my office whom I want to fuck.

F=Married man who pays me for sex. Chief of Staff at one of the gov agencies, appointed by Bush.

J=Lost my virginity to him and fell in love. Dude who has been driving me crazy since 1999. Lives in Springfield, IL. Flies halfway across the country to fuck me, then I don't hear from him for weeks.

MD=Dude from the Senate office I interned in Jan. thru Feb. Hired me as an intern. Broke up my relationship w/ MK (see below).

MK=Serious, long-term boyfriend whom I lived with since 2001. Disastrous break up in March, but still seeing each other.

R=AKA "Threesome Dude." Somebody I would rather forget about.

RS=My new office bf with whom I am embroiled in an office sex scandal. The current favorite.

W=A sugar daddy who wants nothing but anal. Keep trying to end it with him, but the money is too good.


Shit. I'm fucking six guys. Ewww.

Good Luck Iran

“Vice President Cheney’s office has specifically told the Pentagon that the military should be prepared for an attack on Iran in the immediate aftermath of ‘another 9-11.’ ”
Guess where we're going next America? Of course Iran won't have anything to do with the next "9-11" either. This is so bad, so bad. I really really hope the Sears Tower isn't next on the to-do list, but I have a feeling it is. What has this world come to? "The Iran matter seems very serious to me -- it may trigger a major international crisis because, if Iran doesn't go back on its decision, then Iran will be, I would say, in a purely unilateral position," French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy told reporters after a cabinet meeting chaired by President Jacques Chirac." It doesn't even matter if Iran pulls the plug on that because we're going in there no matter what. All I can say is, "Power is temporary." If there is a WWIII , I hope we follow CATO's lead and re-create our government the way it was supposed to be: limited.

I also hear that Syria is coming after Iran, not surprising is it?
It's early.

Care

Found this on maddox and thought it was pretty funny:

"Warblog: A blog that primarily deals with war. Filled with whiny blow hards who are fixated on their stubborn ideas and conspiracy theories. For example, there are countless hours pissed away by conspiracy theorists who think the WTC towers were demolished by bombs planted by the government. These armchair engineers write endlessly about how the physics of the collapse was impossible, how the temperature wasn't hot enough to melt steel, and how the planes were carrying missiles. Of course, the one thing they don't postulate is a REASON.

My personal favorite warblog was one that had a flash animation with people who were quoted as saying "it didn't sound like a plane to me... it sounded like a missile." Thank you Joe Nobody for giving me your expert opinion on what missile sounds like, because gas station superintendents are usually the best people to ask about the sonic signature of ballistic missile thrust."

I thought it was funny becuase in a way he represents the nations ignorance. There is a reason behind it too, just follow where the money goes and you'll see the reasoning behind it all. One thing I don't understand is where someone said the "planes were carrying missles." I've never read that anywhere and so I figure he only brands this subject as stupid is because he got his information from the wrong place. I like his writing a lot since he's hilarious and never serious. So it could be, instead of a dis, some sort of recognition. But no, probably not he sounds pretty firm in it. If instead of reading some insane 40 year old dude's blog he saw a credible video, he might change his mind. I'm not offended at all, why should I be? That's something one of those bitchy soccer moms would do, she'll blame society and have them change their rules just for her. Anyways, it has to be true: Buildings do not fall because they're "on fire." It doesn't matter to him anyways, "Warblogger: Like all other bloggers, an idiot. Usually a self-righteous prick with a political axe to grind. Tragically, these dullards fail to realize that nobody cares what they think. And no, the 2 comments per post you get on average doesn't count. Get some real opinions, then maybe you'll get some real feedback." He's right though, "nobody cares what they think." I should just give up, I mean it's not like I'm doing anything about it anyway. I'll keep my eye out but my mouth shut, untill he comes back to tell me that I was right all along. Then again, what if I was wrong? I can't believe that, after seeing the evidence from these movies nothing can really change my mind. I'm here trying to save you all, but you're all the same. Why was there so many people against Jesus even though what he was doing was right? I sort of feel like I'm in that position, but I don't believe he was on the cross. Who knows, I should change what I write about now anyways. Warblogging is pretty inane when it's saying the same stuff over and over and hope people believe you. If we can't do anything about it then why do we try? Media has screwed up everything, and I'm tired of writing this stuff when now I begin to see no one cares...